Antropoloji Bölümü
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12514/36
Browse
Browsing Antropoloji Bölümü by browse.metadata.publisher "Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Book Part Epipaleolitik-Neolitik Dönem Anadolu toplumlarinin üretim ve ticari faaliyetleri(Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları, 2019) Sıddıq, Abu BakarDuring the early phase of Epipaleolithic Period, like many other regions in West Asia, the seasonally settled mobile hunter-gatherer groups in Anatolia had regular connection with other prehistoric groups lived in close and distant geographical regions. These mobile hunter-gatherer groups produced various types of tools and material objects, and often involved in exchange activities. There was an increase in exchanging activities of precious and symbolic objects in later period, particularly among the semi-settled Late Epipaleolithic groups. On the other hand, with the beginning of Pre-Pottery Neolithic, the prehistoric people in Anatolia were living sedentary life in the permanent villages, and were deeply involved in exchange of technology, culture as well as regional and inter-regional trade activities. These cultural exchanges, along with the regular trade activities, eventually helped the development and spread of Neolithic way of life all across the Southeast, Central and West Anatolia, and their neighboring regions. The new way of life was primarily based on agriculture and animal husbandry, but had a wide range of production activities related to architecture, pottery, stone tools, bone tools, beads, baskets and also a high number of ritual and symbolic materials. With the help of various examples of material cultures and significant archaeological discoveries, this study aims to evaluate different types of production and trade activities, particularly among the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic people groups in Anatolia.Book Part Human-Animal Interactions at Alaybeyi Höyük(Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları, 2019) Sıddıq, Abu BakarZooarchaeological data on the faunal remains unearthed from 2016 and 2017 excavations at Alaybeyi Höyük have primarily been used to understand the animal-based subsistence practices as well as regular and occasional cultural activities at the site. Various aspects of multi-scale, colorful and complex human-animal relationships and interactions have also been explored both with the help of animal remains and some notable cultural objects at this site. Socio-cultural factors such as the value of different animal species as wealth and power, animals’ roles in rituals and symbolic practices, animal-based social status and social stratification have also been the predominant issues in this chapter. Ethnographic accounts about the contemporary social groups in East and Southeast Anatolia were used as supporting sources while discussing these particular issues. Besides, some critical aspects and the contribution of other species in human health and ailments, as well as emotional bonds between human-animal have also been focused while presenting human-animal interactions at Alaybeyi Höyük.Book Part Some ethnoarchaeological notes on Alaybeyi Höyük in the light of present Alaybeyi Village(Bilgin Kültür Sanat Yayınları, 2019) Sıddıq, Abu Bakar; Savaş, Burcu; Çoşar, Engin; Altunkaynak, GülşahEthnographic methods have a long history of use for the reconstruction of human behavior and cultural patterns at archaeological sites (e.g., Broderick, 2016; Sinopoli, 1991). However, although the record and interpretation of living culture have been practiced in academia for centuries, ethnoarchaeology as a sub-discipline of archaeology has emerged particularly during the 1960s. Since then, this disciplinary tool has been applied for examining and solving the archaeological problems including, site formation and depositional processes, documentation of technological advancements, settlement patterns, human-environment interactions, social systems and social strategies, as well as ideologies and belief systems. Aiming to explore some significant clues regarding to the unanswered questions about the subsistence strategies, rituals, animal burials, architecture, technologies, and human-environment interactions at Alaybeyi Höyük, an ethnographic field study was planned to be carried out particularly in Erzurum plain. In this case, the Alaybeyi village was found to be the most suitable study area since it lies at the closest location of Alaybeyi Höyük. Besides, people in the village still live on cattle pastoralism, small scale agriculture, as well as with an environmental condition probably very much similar to that experienced by the Chalcolithic and Iron Age people at Alaybeyi Höyük.